﻿

I recently read the article inRolling Stone about your LGBTQ activism. In light of the extensive work and the hundreds of millions of dollars you have put into this cause, it’s clear that you are driven by great passion and tenacity.

As is the case with most gay and transgender activists, the article explains that your activism is framed as a justice issue, as if the fight for gay rights is in principle the same as the fight blacks endured to secure their civil rights in the mid twentieth century. Therefore, your stated objective is to punish the unjust—or to use your own words, "the wicked”—who oppose gay rights, like those who, because of their (usually Christian) religious beliefs, would not want homosexuality to be promoted or celebrated in their business or organization, or whose consciences would be violated by having to accommodate a gay wedding. I am one of those “wicked” Christians, and I’m writing largely for the sake of clarity and understanding. It may be the case that most Christians don’t understand the motives behind the gay rights movement, and it is definitely the case that gay rights activists like yourself don’t understand the opposition of orthodox Christians against that movement.

Aside from our particular moral convictions about the rights and wrongs of human sexuality, one of the things that is most surprising to us is the outrage evoked by our convictions. Many gay activists are aghast that anyone would have the temerity to believe that homosexual behavior is sinful. We know that many people will disagree with our view on this point, but it is perplexing to the point of being suspicious when people claim they can’t understand this or assume that it could only be the result of mindless prejudice.

Since I believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt, instead of assuming that you’re simply using the civil rights justice rhetoric to manipulate public opinion, I’ll assume that you sincerely mistake Christians for mean-spirited xenophobes. So, here’s a brief explanation to clear things up:

For millennia, Jews and Christians have believed that, like prostitution or incest, sexual relations between people of the same sex is a way of behaving which—though many are born with biological urges towards it—is fundamentally opposed to the way human beings were created to behave. We believe in a personal Creator who created people with both an ideal essence and a faculty of choice which enables us to act in ways that are consistent with or contrary to that essence. Our belief is that sex was designed by God to be experienced only ever within the context of a life-long marriage between one man and one woman. This is exclusive of gay people for exactly the same reason the belief in the importance of monogamy and fidelity is exclusive of polygamists and married people who “fall in love” with someone other than their spouse.

It appears to us that the approach of the LGBTQ movement is to portray this kind of exclusivity as the greatest of all evils and to portray those who believe there is an ideal for human sexuality which requires certain restraints on sexual gratification as people who want to exclude others, just as many whites wanted to exclude blacks from civil rights in the old South. Christians would very much like to hear you explain how discriminating against a person for having a certain skin color is the same as believing a person’s sexual behavior to be immoral. This seems to us like saying that the person who believes it is immoral for a man to have sex with his sister is just as “wicked” as a man who believes Asians are inferior to Europeans because both beliefs are equally “exclusionary."

I also can’t help commenting on the apparent contradiction between your motives and your goals. The general idea of the justice rhetoric is that gay rights is tantamount to human rights, which all human beings have a moral obligation to pursue—and we have this obligation because we should all value the well being of each other and make an effort to enable mutual human flourishing as much as we can. But aside from the question of the inherent morality of certain kinds of sexual behaviors, the facts about the practice and consequences of, particularly male, homosexuality reveal the undeniable reality that this is a behavior which is a direct and pervasive cause of much suffering and destruction.

Certainly you’re not unaware that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have documented the fact that men who have sex with men are over 44 times more likely than other men to contract HIV, and over 40 times more likely than women—and that males who practice homosexuality are over 46 times more likely to contract syphilis than other men, and over 71 times more likely than women. Also according to the CDC, in 2006 men who have sex with men made for 57 percent of people newly infected with HIV in the United States, even though they make up only 2 percent of the adult population. It also needs to be emphasized that HIV could have never reached such epidemic proportions without the propagating engine of characteristically promiscuous, male homosexuality. This is why men who have sex with men are categorically banned from donating blood. In light of this, it is extremely hard to believe that your core motive is to secure the well being of those for whom you claim to seek justice.

Because the propagation of such destructive diseases has resulted primarily from the rampant promiscuity of gay men, a corollary concern comes to the minds of many Christians; if we were to acquiesce to your militant activism and compromise our moral convictions about homosexuality, would you then want to force us to surrender our convictions on chastity and fidelity as well?

In our scripture there is a story of an iron-fisted king who erected a large statue of himself and tried to force his subjects to bow before it. This was an affront to the consciences of three men in the kingdom who wanted to obey God above all other authorities. They did not bow. The king then became angry and threatened to throw them into an inferno. They responded by saying that their God could save them from such a fate, but even if he didn’t, they would not bow. I hope it’s the case that our perception of your intent is not accurate. But it seems to us that, like that evil king, the militant gay rights, sexual “liberation” movement is demanding that we bow before an idol of unrestrained sexual urges which obscures the distinction between an orientation which cannot be controlled and a behavior that can. Though having a family bakery, florist, or photography business forced into bankruptcy through anti-discrimination fines is a mild consequence compared to being thrown alive into a raging fire, it does nonetheless make for painful persecution. However, like those who have gone before us, we know our God can save us from these things. But even if He doesn’t, we will not bow.

I realize how little chance there is that you will actually read this, but perhaps someone who shares your views will. I would be extremely eager to hear a response to these concerns. If we are misguided or confused about the nature of your activism, please explain.